Eurofighter Typhoon successfully got kills on the Raptor, especially when thrust vectoring. The velocity falls so much, they become an easy target to other aircraft operating in the theater. Raptor's strength is in distance and stealth. In a dogfight, it struggles when outnumbered.
The Pentagon canceled more orders for the F-22 for a reason. Against modern adversaries (which USAF hasn't faced in a long time), it's not as effective in reality as it is on paper.
The experiments I've mentioned where conducted by USAF, so F-22 was put against other F's (F-15, F-16).
Of course it is well known that European/Russian planes are more agile. AFAIR F-22 was the first mass-produced supermaneuverable fighter from US. Typhoon is way more advanced and so are a few of currently made russian fighters. In fact almost all MIG/Su fighters designed since 1980s had some supermaneuverability properties.
As for the cancelled orders - I thought it was mainly because of the cost. F-35 can carry the same missiles and destroy the same targets. I think they've found F-22's stealth superiority not worth the money.
I think Tesla mostly makes its money through investments (stock market being the biggest one) over actual product sales. Tesla is now worth more than GM even though it lost $600 million last year. I don't think I have to explain what's wrong with this picture.
I don't think they've ever made money, actually:
Yes, in a way it's very much like IT stock bubbles we've already seen. Tesla's stock cap has nothing to do with financial plans etc. It's all built around a belief that they might rule the world one day.
Tesla is not paying any dividends and declared to keep it that way when they become profitable:
"Tesla has never declared dividends on our common stock. We intend on retaining all future earnings to finance future growth and therefore, do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future."
[
http://ir.tesla.com/faq.cfm]
The current stock cap is so high they'll need over a decade to match it in actual cashflows (if they develop as planned...).
Also, we should not think about cars. Tesla is actually all about batteries and autonomous driving. The car is just a tech showcase and is not exactly a great all-rounder. It's neither fast nor comfortable.
I didn't have an oportunity to drive it (and I don't think it'll happen), but I was a passenger once and it was really disappointing. With the flat floor, huge LCD and very weird seats, I felt like sitting on a sofa, watching a TV.
So it makes total sense that Musk now plans to give us tunnels with platforms that will carry the car, so you don't have to drive at all. Basically, he's hoping to give us a mobile living room. I'm just waiting for a moment when the car becomes modular. You know: once home the seat will detach and carry you inside (no innovation here - The Jetsons had that 50 years ago
).
If that's the future, Tesla is clearly the company that understands it best.
But if I actually wanted to buy an electric CAR, I'd rather get the e-Golf...
I don't get it. I really don't. Tesla should have folded by now and it's stock should be a penny stock. Someone is propping them up and it isn't just Musk himself. Government subsidies explains some of it, not all of it.
Simple speculation - IMO driven mostly by individual investors (also investing via large institutions). Americans love american companies - especially if they find them innovative and patriotic. Musk's empire fits beautifully.
Also, at any moment, Tesla could drop the car and become a worldwide leader in car batteries and auto driving systems. They could instantly become profitable, so maybe that's what investors are hoping for.